Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
only time i get over 60 is running solo. forget warlords and forget livonia. even solo they completely drop my frames to 20-30. said part is i play mostly public servers so i have learned to tolerate it.
when i play solo im looking at the screen and im confused by how good it looks and then i have to remind myself that it should be like that all the time. =]
Fact of the matter is mod innovation was at its prime with Arma 2. You don't have the AI with Arma 3. You don't have the plethora of simulation features with Arma 3. You don't have the cinematic atmosphere in Arma 3. Hell, promoting Life servers was never a thing until Arma 3 came around. Referring to Arma had always been "milsim/simulator" but now is "open-sandbox". That's Marketing 101. They are most definitely trying to expand their primary market. Also, Arma 3 wasn't even supposed to be a "milsim" game originally (freaking alien based). But sure, tell me how Arma is just as consistent, no change.
Reality is Bohemia Interactive is heading in a less serious direction with the series. I'm not saying they won't maintain these tactical elements, but it will not be that hardcore simulation that was originally promised a decade ago.
You do know that most of what ACE2 had (weapon resting, encumbrance inventory not based on slots, etc.) was eventually integrated directly into the engine with Arma 3.
...?
What exactly is stopping you from replicating this "cinematic atmosphere" in Arma 3? Can you provide an example of this?
Can you show an example of an advertisement or public statement from Bohemia that promotes Life servers?
Again, placing more emphasis on the sandbox nature was what Bohemia took advantage of after DayZ. Not a surprise considering how many games like PUBG were spawned directly from their successes on Arma 2/3.
You do realise that they chose the Futura route precisely because focusing exclusively on milsim was leading the series to the grave, right? Once again, had it not been for DayZ Arma would have ended at Private Military Company. You seem to ignore this part as to why they chose to promote Arma's sandbox more widely.
It's marketed as a military sandbox, is primarily played by milsimmers and still sells military-themed DLCs. The platform updates introduce gameplay mechanics intended for milsim and move away from series' arcadey roots (sensors from Jets DLC replacing the magic radar, for instance).
The public community has certainly shifted away from traditional gamemodes like CTI (unfortunately) but the series itself has not changed from its milsim roots.
Can you list examples of OFP, Arma 1 and Arma 2 having better hardcode simulation elements compared to Arma 3? You also have not provided examples of Bohemia becoming "less serious" other than the fact that they are promoting Arma's sandbox aspect more openly.
When they actually have something on the market then you can start making comparisons...
Combined with typical modlists, we're talking 300GB.
Totally ignored what I said. I stated very specifically that features were "missing". That means they still aren't there with Arma 3 (even with mods). Nice try with the logical fallacy.
I'm more or less talking about how Arma 2 simulated a living/breathing environment. Arma 3 can actually feel dead at times (quite the opposite with A2). Video example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Af6e0n7fQ&ab_channel=ARMA2official
You just literally disproved your own argument here XD The fact that they decided against an exclusive simulation focus with Arma is my entire point. They did it, to you put it in your own words, to save their company and generate more sales. Thus, they made it more "generic", which was my whole point.
Let's see. Go Karts, futuristic equipment that no one uses other than life servers, futuristic tanks, and aliens. Sure, very realistic /s
Sure, not using futuristic/fake equipment is a start. An actual First Aid Module, Town Generator Module, Surrender Module. Throw in mod features that don't exist in Arma 3 and you're good to go.
That's fair, but I can assure you it will happen. You can take that to the bank.
I won't be responding to any reply you make (so it will just be a waste of time like arguing against a wall). You obviously have a strong bias. I started with Arma 3 first (thinking latest is greatest) and switched over when I saw the clear superiority. Oh well, what are ya gonna do :/
Lack of civilian variety is certainly an issue but the Civilian Presence module exists for this reason.
Except they didn't make it "generic"? They advertised the sandbox aspect of Arma 3 more openly but the core of the game is still milsim.
Your premise still assumes that they turned Arma arcadey when the opposite has occurred with each platform update:
I highly doubt that your average Lifer knows how to use AFM, gets how the sensor system works, or even understands what RHA is. Would you care to take a guess as to which audience these features were aimed towards?
A DLC that was created in the developers spare time for charity purposes and as an April Fool's joke is your prime example? By the way, I asked for an instance where Life servers were officially promoted by Bohemia.
I'm pretty sure people join Life servers to roleplay as law enforcement for their power fantasies, not to use military equipment locked behind a DLC paywall. Are you also calling the T-14, Rooikat and Wiesel "futuristic"? I guess you'd better inform Russian, South African and German military leaders that they shouldn't be using "futuristic" tanks.
There are also no "aliens" in Arma 3 unless you activate the Contact campaign. It's kept separate for a reason because they knew snowflakes would get pissy about ayylmaos in "muh simulator".
So in reality your gripe all along has nothing to do with Arma 3 being "generic" but rather that it isn't set in the contemporary times with Humvees, AKs and M16s. You could've just stated that from the start instead of making up things about Bohemia catering to casuals...
A2 is remembered as best by many due to:
Community - the peak period of thriving for all kinds of players, arcade, milsim, roleplay. Community was healthy, friendly and creative.
Game concept - OFP and A1 lacked visuals, which A2 delivered even though bad performance was an issue for many, still A2 is the perfect balance for the time that is between good bearable visuals and technicality, features.
Ambience - Even though A2 setting is a fictional wanna-be setting reminiscent of the Ukraine conflict (which didn't happen at the release) the factions used were and are still most favored. Those particular years are most popular in FPS games, ie cold war to modern war on terrorism with major factions such as US, Russia, UK, China, Germany. In particular mid east terrains attract most players. A3 although waaaay better looking and bigger did not find the sympathy like A2 did. Many like myself know Chernarus inside and out and can navigate anywhere without a map even, very few can do that with Altis or Stratis, let alone Tanoa which barely gets any attention and I won't even talk about Livonia (arma 2 mod btw, repackaged for A3)
Game settings - A2 was balanced to be more hardcore, hard to play, clunky, annoying but this gave the experience everyone loved in arma in general. All the annoying bugs and crappy graphics are immediately forgiven seeing how the game offered true teamplay. I have SO MANY great memories, played on countless servers from many countries in so many unrepeatable scenarios. A3 is barren in comparison.
Developers listened to the community - and delivered too, up until DayZ mod where things started to shift under peer pressure and arma begun loosing it's shine.
Mod makers were inspired - most popular mods in A3 are either A2 repackaged or inspired. But in A2 even though there was no launcher and modding was pain in the a** many made these mods, and a whole fledged launcher by a community came out, then another one, then sync tools, then radio mods for teamspeak. Because that's how worth it was to go through all the annoyances to enjoy the gameplay. In A3 you have infinite mods, arsenal which is amazing but the game feels boring, washed out, something is missing and that something is the arma formula.
Engine is not optimized BUT it's not the engine solely at fault. Server hosts simply don't adjust the right server settings and do not make optimized missions and BIS doesn't give them an easy solution to do so. Default settings are BAD hence performance sucks.
2 major issues - arma doesn't use more than 10% of your internet speed which. And your FPS is limited by server performance because server has to sync everything, if certain things were client only rather than server side (like animations and positioning) you'd see a drastic jump in performance. Then shaders, then LOD, then AI calculations (which eat up a lot of power compared to A2 and A1 yet still behave the same) etc
So true. And it came by default for everyone not having to dig settings and adjust.
A1 and A2 are called recrutainment, very few know of this but A2 was a direct parallel release like Americas Army series - aimed to RECRUIT and PROPAGATE idea of service and western influence. Community didn't care about this but used the game as a platform to make own content and scenarios. Recrutainment for those who don't know - recruiting via entertainment.
A3 is a sandbox shooter, without the recrutainment element, hence a soft simulator. Thus BIS removed so much from the game and added visuals and such.
Here's what's coming up soon and what may come up in a few years. Like an old school diehard fan of arma I prefer of course arma but monopoly won't last for long.
1. Developers of Tarkov, BattleState, used Tarkov as a learning platform and a fund source. Their previous game was similar called Contract Wars. A few years back one of the developers posted on their forum that Tarkov is just a temporary jumping point so they can gather intel and funding for their next project. And their next project is in fact a sandbox simulator the likes of tarkov but on a large scale. Even now Tarkov features unusual features like realistic weapon systems and so on. Everything is heading in this direction although not much is known.
2. Squad - This game was developed by a team of developers who left Project Reality mod that was made for Battlefield 2, yes an arcady game like that had this AMAZING mod which IMHO outperforms arma in features and ambience even to this day. Squad devs made Squad softer but their main goal is to replicate PR experience and outperform it. Considering they use UE4 and have a steady income and rise in players the project is growing and will eventually grow into an open world milsim game the likes of PR mod only this time Squad will be 100 times better and more saturade. Even now arma is under pressure by this game due to all the small bits it offers and arma doesn't.
3. TitanIM version by MicroProse. Honestly I don't know if this will live up to the expectations but if it does, that's one nice milsim sandboxer coming up.
4. VR games like ONWARD (there's few out already but some are in development) that will explore sandbox milsim experience. It will take a few years for sure before a solid open world VR combat experience is made.
5. A simulator based on Outerra engine, very few bits of info on this but it is in the works. it is possible that it's the game by microprose.
6. A combat sim based on Space Engine. Russian dev of this engine did hint on a few occations that someone may be making one of these. Space Engine is IMHO one of the best space exploration engines out there. Unmatched ans stunning in every way.
7. DCS World devs (Eagle Dynamic and Flying Legends) may in fact make a new title eventually once focused on both ground and air. Tanks update was a testing platform as their engine is 17+ years old. Recently they made major changes to the engine that hint possible new terrains that are ready for ground troops. Latest terrain DLCs are in fact more and more complicated to the point ground level detail is way better than most sandbox games out there and yet this is a flight sim. Also to clarify - dlcs cost a lot for a reason, a single aircraft is more complex than all of the vehicles in arma combined and these receive regular updates too. Most in this game can fly 1-2 aircraft only anyway.
8. There's a rumor that old PR staff which was left with PR may develop own game. Not much is known but time will tell.
9. There's another rumor that developers of Kingdom Come: Deliverance (ie ex BIS staff that made arma series great who left) that their next title may be a combat FPS.
10. There's yet another rumor that devs of Insurgency series may make a sandboxer too but a softcore one.
11. Americas Army 5. In development, confirmed. But TBH I am not a fan of the series. Still, it is similar to what arma does.
12. Before renaming themselves Omni, Virtuix Omni (treadmill devs) announced that they may be working on a milsim sandboxed with partners. Later they changed their biz into entertainment for public and VR training for military and police. However this doesn't mean they abandoned the idea, perhaps they are testing things and may eventually fund a simulator to feature their treadmills with just like VBS does with modules.
I think that's more than enough competition...